Scientists say the sun is getter hotter and brighter. That’s something that’s been going on throughout its life and will continue until it enters its red giant phase in about 5 billion years. In about 1 billion years, it’s estimated the Earth will be too hot for liquid water. If you want my advice — and I’m telling you right now that you do — we should have a plan in place to get the human race off of the planet within 500 million years. And I’d recommend we get a better central power source for our new ecosystem than a star; natural fusion is just sketchy and unreliable.

There are a lot of people, though, saying we have to worry about the greenhouse effect making things too hot on Earth in like the next hundred years or something. That seems like complete and utter nonsense on the surface; I mean, the sun is already destined to try and kill us, so why are we worried about carbon? Still, a lot of people are like, really sure about it and say the ice caps are going to melt and then … bad things. If you really want to know about it, ask Al Gore, and he’ll be happy to show you some slides on the subject. It would be nice of you to act interested, because he’s going through a lot and could really use a friend right now.

Anyway, so a lot of scientists — and especially politicians, actors, and musicians — are really, really super certain we have to do something about this “global climate warming change,” as they call it, but seem unable to convince the average man it’s not a bunch of mumbo jumbo — especially to the extent that everyone is going to agree to economy-massacring policies. That seems perfectly rational to me; if I’m wrong, and we’re destined for doom but the only way to live is to be a bunch of hippies, I’d rather be dead. Also, new, cleaner technologies seem unlikely to emerge in markets stifled by socialism and controlled by the meddling morons who usually populate government. So I’m happy to punt this possible crisis down the road and worry about the more concrete and better understood problem that the sun is eventually going to kill us all.

Which apparently makes me like someone who denies the murders of millions of Jews in the Holocaust.

See, the other day, Paul McCartney (who long ago participated in creating a song warning of the global warming crisis, the chilling “Here Comes the Sun”) compared skepticism about global warming to Holocaust denial. And he’s certainly not the first. And it’s even quite common among the super-certain community of actors, musicians, and whatnot who became concerned about global warming after reading an article about it in Newsweek to use the term “climate change denial” to try and more subtly invoke the comparison.

And that’s morally disgusting.

Do these people not understand what the Holocaust was? We’re talking about a coordinated attempt to exterminate the Jews. Millions of them were rounded up and sent to forced labor camps and killed in gas chambers. It’s horrific beyond belief. How could one compare the temperature possibly rising a couple degrees to people being put in ovens? What low opinion must those people have of Jews — of their fellow human beings?

And what are those making the comparison saying about the evidence of the Holocaust? It wasn’t like the only evidence of it was a bunch of scientists pointing to a computer simulation saying what they think would happen to the Jewish population in Europe. And you know how we get a really cold winter and we have all the global warming people assure us that “sometimes global warming can cause it to become colder — we predicted that but didn’t feel like mentioning it until now”? Is there an equivalent with the Holocaust where suddenly the Jewish population shot up during it and we had scientists explaining how mass murder sometimes causes that?

And then there are the horrific pictures of the piles of dead bodies from the Nazi concentration camps. What pictures do the global warming people have? They have their popular one of a polar bear on what looks like a melting piece of ice, and we’re supposed to feel bad for the polar bear even though they like to swim. Plus, there are the eyewitness accounts of victims of the Holocaust, while all global warming has are some people saying how it seems a bit hotter than usual (but don’t mention if it’s cooler than usual because that’s unscientific).

The fact is, the evidence for the Holocaust is so concrete, the only people who would deny it are anti-Semites who don’t want to face the horrors of what their hatred could lead to. On the other hand, global warming evidence is a bunch of eggheads (and even more dimwitted actors, musicians, and journalists) pointing to a bunch of numbers on a piece of paper. It is absolutely asinine in comparison. To even compare the two as equivalent in any way is itself a sort of Holocaust denial.

The Holocaust was the nadir of humanity, the worst man can be to his fellow man, and it’s not some political point to be tossed around because you’re super duper certain your issue is really, really important. If the people worrying about global warming want to convince others, maybe they should reflect a bit more on how to be less repugnant about it. Otherwise, I might just decide to leave them here on Earth when I finish my plan to escape the tyrannical sun. Then McCartney and friends will be left to sit here and wait as here comes the sun.

Frank J. Fleming is the author of the novel Superego and the humor book Punch Your Inner Hippie, has penned numerous political humor columns, blogs at IMAO.us, and is a writer for the creative agency Emergent Order.

I’m no scientist (but then again, neither is the majority of those on the IPCC) but here’s a dumb experiment. Fill a glass with ice cubes and add water, then let the cubes melt. The water level should stay the same, right? Same thing if the polar ice cap melts, right?

Fascinating how the virulent Jew-hating leftists and Islamists who hold global conferences denying the Holocaust use it to describe what the state of Israel is supposedly doing to Muslims and to gain world sympathy.

And it gets even more interesting. The Earths crust .. ground.. is not a static system. It rests on a fluid dynamic. As the landlocked ice melts the ground underneath rebounds upwards and I would s’pose all those tons of now liquid water would depress the mantle which now bears it’s load.

You cut geography class much too often. The ice caps aren’t giant ice cubes floating in an ocean of water – they’re on land, above sea level. If they melt, the water they contain will flow downhill, off the land, and into the ocean.

You’re half right, the southern ice cap is on a land mass – Antarctica. If all the ice were to melt off of that then the sea levels would rise. The northern ice cap, on the other hand, is just one gigantic floating ice cube; thus consistent with Archimedes’ famous bath-time discovery, there would be no rise in sea levels if all that ice melted (assuming everything else stayed unchanged).

The basic difference between Holocaust denial and global-warming skepticism is that the Holocaust happened in the past and global warming will happen in the future. So, a more relevant (and moral) comparison would be with Holocaust skepticism before it happened. Yet, plenty of people were skeptical that a Holocaust would happen before it actually happened, including plenty of leftists. After all, leftists in the Soviet Union actually allied themselves with Hitler in 1939, something one presumes they wouldn’t have done if they had known the Holocaust was coming.

Why do you think Stalin would have shed tears over the murder of Jews & Gypsies? He actually killed more people (i.e. Ukrainians) than Hitler in the Holocausts he engineered.

BTW, if Stalin did not agree to join with Hitler in the attack on Poland, the Second World War would not have happened. Stalin is every bit as responsible for the war as fellow progressive-leftist Hitler.

Just know that if you really believe that Sir Paul was justified in his use of the Holocaust to criticize Global-Warming skeptics you are also indirectly justifying people who compare Barack Obama’s coming to power with Hitler.

Saying (correctly) that Sir Paul McCartney “participated in creating a song” is not the same as suggesting that he wrote it. McCartney played bass, and sang backing vocals, on The Beatles’ “Here Comes the Sun”, along with Ringo Starr and the late George Harrison. Seventeen orchestral musicians also participated.

Gore has already stated in his 2000 campaign that the Earth can’t truly support more than 2 billion people. He didn’t mention what to do with the extras – presumably Gore himself is not an “extra”. How ever, getting rid of 4 to 5 billion people is a big job, and needs a lot of (political) power. The AGW campaign was designed to concentrate enough power to get the job done.

The earth can easily support a population 2 or 3 times as big as what we have today.
There is no eco-apocalypse.
The earth’s population will peak out on it’s own in the next decade or so, then start falling.

Now I see a post of my concern. The use of Gloabal Warming and the FACTS that support mass murder of Jews seems a bit of a rant. The Scientific studies of 10-15k years ago is somewhat exact, just as we don’t know exact how many Jews were murdered. The earth has been in constant change for billions of years, and so has the destruction of mankind, for however long we have developed. Still comes down to why they woke 2010 years ago and decided, lets start the calendar over. What happened to make them do that?

The Earth got hit by a slew of meteors which rang the place like a bell. The water in the sky, and the water underneath spurted along with great volcanism (even today 70% of a volcanic spew is water) which heated the water. The world got covered by warm water. Evaporation kicked in, and the sky got covered with a permanent cloud cover. Mountains rose as the weight of the water gathering in the sinking ocean basins increased.

Now comes the ice. You need three things for an ice ‘age’. Warm water that is easily evaporated. Cool summers that don’t melt too much ice. Warm winters because too much cold (like in the center of Antartica) does not yield snow. It yields very cold, very dry air with almost no snow.

The oceans cool to modern-ish temperatures. Now the evaporation is harder, and the skies clear. Now the summers are hotter, and the winters colder. The ice begins to melt, and we find the oceans rising, and we’ve come to the explanation for the movement of the Sea Peoples. Their old cities are being covered by water.

Why do those who devoutly accept the theory that gasses emitted in the production of energy are causing the globe to warm demand the destruction of hydro-electric dams, fervently oppose the construction of nuclear power plants and have multiple homes each with enormous carbon footprints? One can only conclude that AGW is BS fed to fools for the purpose of acquiring greater power and wealth for the ones doing the feeding.

And KKK Kleagal, as well as Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd was elected to the US Senate as a democrat. What is your point…

… oh yeah,Republicans nixed Duke after one term at State level politics, Your man was warmly embraced for over 50 years by racist democrats. And looking at the damage democrat policies have done to Blacks, perhaps there is a better holocaust analogy here. david Duke no doubt envies Byrds accomplishments in destroying Blacks.

Byrd was elected at the time of the Dixiecrats, most of whom migrated to the GOP as the Democratic party moved left and favored equal rights. Lie many young fools, Byrd evolved and matured. Time and time again he expressed his regret for having a short affiliation with the KKK.

I’m fairly certain that no one here has a problem with regulating SOx and NOx which are the hazardous emissions from buring fossil fuels. What we have a problem with is the regulation of CO2… something that you exhale with every breath you have ever taken in a higher concentration than exists in the atmosphere. What are the terrible health effects you are suffering from as a result of your constant exposure to frightening levels of CO2?

Another whiner. I’d like to see links that show me you no longer are sucking on teat of Big Energy or using any source to heat or power your home that involves the production of Carbon Dioxide. Otherwise do us all a favor and quit torturing the electrons you are using for silly posts.
BTW: If you aren’t leading by example you having nothing to say in support of AGW.

Who are more likely to be Holocaust deniers? The Nazi’s I would think! Thank you very much! It’s the climate change alarmists and the fraudsters including the UN IPCC, Al Gore, Mann, Schneider, Jones, and ‘Tom Cobly and more’, any anyone who received monies to prove AGW, not to disprove! Or do a genuine scientific research project – so who has the most to lose? Being charged with crimes against humanity. That I feel the former mentioned should be charged with? I am so annoyed by their rebuttals, that if they offered their evidence in a court of law, anywhere in the democratic world, they would lose completely. Probably be charged with financial gain from falsified
subterfuge. Fraud?

Unfortunately with the trillions of dollars tied up in clean energy (if there is any without a big dollar sign attached!) and Carbon trading, who will be game to burst the bubble? Leaving heaps of people with loss of income, jobs
and investments, including governments and pension schemes stupid enough to invest in carbon trading schemes?

As Schneider was the one in the late 1970s screaming ‘an Ice Age commeth’ he’ll now blame it on AGW. (Available on U Tube by the way). Well the fact is
that warming does precede a glacial period. And as a natural ice planet we do
fluctuate between interglacials and full glacials, the latter we don’t won’t to occur at all.

They have ignored the Medieval Warm Period from 800 – 1300 AD,(Warmer than today) the Mini Ice Age from 1300 – 1800 AD. (Somewhat colder than today) We are naturally an ice planet, fluctuating between glacial periods and warmer periods. However, we’ll become cooler for sure!

And J.J – absolutely correct. However, 90% of fresh water on this globe is
held in the Antarctica. It is not melting, sure it has it’s break offs, but remember it is a land mass not like the Artic ice flows. (Not the arctic circle).

And if my predictions are right, are sea levels are likely to decrease on increase. As more ice is taken up by the polar regions.

Keep hammering these frauds and governments because if you don’t they will
have us all believing the AGW myth, and Cap ‘n Trades etc., will increase consumers prices. And if it doesn’t kill this all, CO2 doesn’t effect the climate anyway! 99% is natural produced and 1 percent is us breathing etc.

The Holocaust, not being taught in school and in fact seen by leftists as a violation of the rights of Moslem students if it was to be taught, has lost all its identifiable understanding. It is now the cry of anyone who disgarees with your philosophy. Whether it is the global warming fanatics, those that wish to destroy Israel and even those who oppose the Tea Party movement. Perhaps it is not only time to take back the discussion and put it into true moral terms, but time to take back our children’s education from the dingbats and marxist lovers that have destroyed our chidlren’s ability to think for themselves. Of course, in that repect we have only ourselves to blame, don’t we.

Fleming is right on target. Sadly, JINO’s like ‘David Stein’ lump every Gentile they disagree with policy-wise into ‘David Duke’ supporters, a slanderous defamation if I ever saw one. I applaud Mr. Fleming for stating the obvious.. that the Holocaust is a proven, horrendous example of Idealogues Gone Wild, and honestly a potential Road Map for the Leftist-Islamist Alliance, given their virulent hatred of everything authentically Jewish and Israeli. The worst part in all of these discussion of global warming or any other cause celebre of the Left is the small but vocal JINO (Jews In Name Only) contingent that stridently marches with those who would be their executioners. As a practicing Jew in the Midwest, I find this to be the bigger danger to the existence of Jews than any thing a non-Jew could ever possibly espouse.

funny how you lump all environmentalists together. As for the JINO assertion, Well I have news for you, I served in a combat unit of the Israeli army for a number years. Whe yo throwing an insult at someone, you might find a surprising result. Thank yo in advance for your apology

There are plenty of Israeli Left wingers who served in the IDF currently active in working against the security of Israel… Gilad Hatzmoni in Holland and Ran HaCohen come to mind. I thank them and you for their service, but I see no reason to apologize for stating the truth. Sincere Shintos can perform wonderous deeds for Israel, but it does not elevate their credentials as Jews.

Be that as it may, I believe the climate-is-falling crowd has to sharpen its science considerably before imposing further family-crushing economics on all of us, via the Democratic Party. Nobody wants to breath polluted air or drink dirty water, much agreed. But the measures POTUS is advancing go far beyond what is reasonable and their source of financing escapes me… unless one wishes to grind the US economy to a halt. Then, it all makes sense.

Global warming denial = holocaust denial. Just another delusion from a drug-addled brain. Remember — McCartney took ALOT of drugs in the 60′s. We all live in a yellow submarine, yellow submarine, yellow submarine.

Well said! People need to stop worrying about things they cannot control and take more concern of their own personal actions. We (man) thinks he is in control – but he is not. So live your life as a good steward and quit worrying about stuff you can’t impact anyway.

Scientists “seem unable to convince the average man it’s not a bunch of mumbo jumbo” – not sure where you drag this ‘fact’ out from? I think the problem is that the ‘average’ man has been quite convinced as to the veracity of global warming – be it genuine or not, and leaving aside the reasons why he may have been so convinced.

You’re guilty here of simply projecting your own blanket doubts – and those of the minority who agree with you – onto the population at large. It’s the easiest thing in the world to simply state “everyone knows….” or “the majority of people are clearly aware…” without providing any evidence to support your statement; especially in a friendly environment such as this where many readers are naturally inclined to agree without considering the merits of your argument. In just the same way, a nutty ‘historian’ can write “the majority of people are clearly quite convinced that the holocaust never happened” – easy to say, and those idiots to are predisposed to agree will always blindly cheer him on.

I’m afraid that nothing you’ve written here is really informative, helpful, intelligent or supportive to the larger argument.

Who said anything about majority rule constituting truth? I’m not commenting on the truth or otherwise of global warming. I’m pointing out that you can’t simply state that “the average man” is already convinced it’s a load of “mumbo-jumbo” and take that as your starting point for a supposedly logical argument. The average man is patently NOT convinced it’s a load of mumbo-jumbo. That’s the whole problem. The MSM has already convinced 90%+ of the general public that it’s Gospel. The writer seems to totally fail to understand this point.

Kevin he is just committing the Logical fallacy which is extremely popular both with left wing moonbats and Mohammedans alike that of “Argumentum ad populem” . But as both moonbats and Mohammedans are complete strangers to the logical thought process they most probably dont even know they are doing it and whats more would not understand you when you point it out to them. Blind HYPOCRISY is an essential part of both left win moonbattednesss and Islam.

Sometimes I wonder what world some of you guys live in – is it the same one your typical left-wing dimwit inhabits? Proof, I guess, that bigotry and stupidity aren’t solely reserved for one side of the political spectrum.

To repeat (one last time: if you still don’t get it, I’ll leave you to it) – we’re not helping ourselves by repeating ‘arguments’ which runs ‘everyone knows….’ and just presuming everyone else will accept it’s true because we do. You wanna change people’s minds, you do it with intelligent, rational argument. If ‘everyone knew’ then the world would be in a much better state than it is, and we wouldn’t need to make these points on websites such as this. Everyone DOESN’T know, that’s the whole point. We aren’t the whole world here, or even, unfortunately, representative of the views of most of it. More’s the pity: I wish we were. Or that some of us were, at least.

Those who spend their entire time posting mutually congratulatory comments along the lines of ‘wonderful post, brilliantly argued’ to half-baked, disorganized drivel such as this (even when the central premise may be quite correct) aren’t helping to further any cause bar their own self-esteem.

I actually misread you. In your statement, “I think the problem is that the ‘average’ man has been quite convinced as to the veracity of global warming – be it genuine or not, and leaving aside the reasons why he may have been so convinced.”, I read “genuine or not” as applied to the convincing of the ‘average man’ (as in, whether he be truly converted or not). You see, because you wrote “and leaving aside the reasons why “he” may have been so convinced” after your hyphen, it seems to (re)establish the implication of “genuine or not” with the ‘average man’. Also, ‘veracity’ applied to “global warming” seems anthropomorphic, so when it seemed to reconnect to the ‘average man’ I didn’t doubt it, it being a more direct line (no poetics) of reason. Perhaps, it would been more clear to have written, “and leaving aside the reasons why “it” is so convincing [to the 'average' man].”? Or, maybe your last comma should be another hyphen?

You seemed to be making little of the truth or falsehood of such a popular vote fallacy, as it were, and it was there that I pushed my quasi-rhetorical question about your particular thought. I was wary to not go beyond that rhetorical device.

My point here is to show you how I justified myself in my response, though I was wrong in my comprehension.

The whole of the issue is to change the ‘economy’ from a petroleum based economy to a “green” economy, and pronto, too. That means re engineering an entire society around this Utopian ‘vision.’

To those who would use the ‘Holocaust’ as their tool for leveraging non believers into their corner, as though that is an argument worthy of changing ones mind, their point is the earth is in danger and that is the “holocast”, as based on the faith of Gaia proposed by Mr. James Lovelock in the 1960′s. It’s a religion. A faith. Religions need faith alone. Although originally described as a “scientific” theory that the planet is itself a single organism. And reacts to the ‘leeches’ and ‘vermin’ on its skin (the surface of the earth). No “science” supports it.

Humans are the ‘leeches’ and ‘vermin’. As no other creature supposedly “harms” the earth. A green economy is their belief they are applying a sort of ‘first aid’ to the ‘wounds’ of thoughtless mankind.

But their theory itself is based more on faith than the Christian religion. At least Christianity has some recorded history as some substantive evidence. Where as there is no evidence to support the hypothesis that the earth is a single living organism. Not even a little bit.

I’m living and working (temporarily) in Ireland. Here, they have come to the realization that global warming is a hoax designed for the immediate translation of economic foundations from petroleum to ‘green energy’ promoted by ideologues and to establish a U.N. global tax on energy use. But they have also done their homework.
Physics doesn’t support such a conversion based on the worlds present energy needs. And while not a bad idea for supplementation of energy, present ‘green’ methods are inescapably inadequate.

There are some very interesting experiments being conducted for several promising supplements, but nothing can compare to the versatility of petroleum, coal and natural gas today or in the near future. And passing water and filling your shoes is only going to make you smell.

Taxes are a poor way of creating a new economy. As we presently see the evidence that taxes actually only create greed and that produces more need for increased taxes. Nothing has ever been created by taxes, except poverty and slavery.

“I am curious as to how we fund our military, our Federal Highway system, and our fire, police, and teachers?”

You obviously don’t understand the difference between “create” and “fund”.

The “Teachers”, the education, the schools, ALL where private inventions, never government-led developments in humanity. Do you think governments “invented” highways? The only thing governments do is: wait for some private people invent some really good, innovatives things… and then tax it, regulate it or plainly nationalise it in order to have a government monopoly.

Then, we are all going to read dumb comments about government inventing things… bloody stupid!

The only part of government that has created things regularly was NASA, back when we had a vigorous and well-supported space programs… think MRIs, EKGs, etc. Sadly, the space program is being stripped down and parted out by folks who think long-range planning means looking forward to the next election cycle.

NASA created nothing that wasn’t already under development.
The absolute best that can be said of NASA is that it advanced the development of a few isolated technologies by a few months. At the cost of billions.

This heat-wave is sure going have an influence on thinking. The only thing I would offer as a disclaimer is remember that the Global-Warming prophets have qualified their predictions on anthropogenic carbon-driven climate change. If the sun is doing the warming, or if it just happens to be a natural cycle then it would be an act of God or nature, and they would be wrong. Nevertheless, it will appear that they were right to many people. Enough people? Probably.

AGW advocates say their scientits have determined beyond a shadow of a doubt that global warming is caused by excess carbon in the atmosphere and not caused by the sun when, to my knowledge, there are no weather stations that record solar exposure. Mann and his ilk have determined that carbon emissions are causing global warming beyond a shadow of a doubt based soley on temperature data recorded at unmaned facilities and guestimated temperatures pulled from tree rings, which are then ran through software which “cleans up” the and melds the numbers together. I just dont’ buy it. The engineer in me wants to slap anyone who thinks there is nothing wrong with the AGW crowd’s process of extrapulating data.

The future Brown Shirts were in evidence at the last 10 or so G20 meetings. You are called a Holocaust Denier because even a stupid argument is better than the truth. I have run out of reasonable responses to some of these idiots so I tell than that ignorance is curable and stupid is bone deep and forever and they are just stupid.

If “Sir” Paul has two brain cells left then he’s at least twice as intelligent as Ozzie, Robert and Jimmie (but the evidence is against it). Those guys live in a heaven of their own making where they’re someone important, someone who should be sought out and asked their opinion on all sorts of stuff like anthropogenic global warming, the Bertini Intra-Nuclear cascade, flying saucers, and what’s for lunch. Never mind that not one of them has so much as a 6th grade education! But I would hate to be in their shoes: You have to go to a party with BO? That looks a lot like hell from where I’m sitting.

Celebrity is its own punishment. They took the money, now they can take the flack.

Ever notice how the folks who accuse others of being “holocaust deniers” never accuse actual holocaust deniers of being such? Do you think “Sir” Paul McCartney would ever say a disparaging word about Ahmadinejad? Piss off “Sir” Paul!

Isn’t he just so brave for standing up to raaacist teabaggers as he did. The good people of Britain must sleep soundly in their beds with such brave knights of the realm as “Sir” Paul McCartney keeping watch.

Holocaust has more than one meaning. When you add ‘holocaust denier’ the meaning is quite specific.

Agreed, what should be obvious, that calling someone who questions the scientific global warming hypothesis, with all that entails, with holocaust denial is morally repugnant.

Paul McCartney is an accomplished musician although as has been pointed out did not write “here comes the sun” George did based on some ideas he developed with Eric Clapton. Back when, my wife and I started every Sunday morning with that to get us going for the rest of the day.

So no need to get uptight about what he said. Why should I care about that at all? Only reason I can imagine is that a big old guy celebrity said it and it then becomes political. What does Madonna think?

Politics on the AGW front are now set I think. We have a collapsing global economy. There are no dollars or euros left to print. This stuff is science fiction now. People where I live in the formerly industrial US heartland could care less. They need jobs and hours.

Government now wants the few who still can pay taxes to produce more. We cannot. We are doing all we can do and business everywhere is drying up.

The comparison is nothing more than a sophomoric ad hominem attack, nothing less than the cliched accusation and comparison of you being a Nazi intended to shock and induce thoughtless knee-jerk reactions.

When such verbiage comes into the equation, it proves that their position is intellectually bankrupt – the debate has ended, and has become nothing more than a childish, pointless argument.